The Syrian army’s rapid-fire conquest of important areas and towns previously controlled by the U.S.-allied Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), culminated on Sunday in a fragile ceasefire agreement with a stern warning from a powerful U.S. Senator and experts about the reported crimes of forces controlled by President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Jim Risch, R-Idaho., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Fox News Digital, ‘The Syrian government’s decree to respect Kurdish rights is a good sign, but the conduct of its forces on the ground must match. Division and violence in Syria between U.S. partners only benefit bad actors like ISIS and Iran who exploit Syria to use as a breeding ground for international terrorism, including against the U.S. I welcome the announcement of a ceasefire and will be watching its implementation closely.’

Al-Sharaa, a former U.S.-designated terrorist who was a member of the Islamic State and al-Qaeda, greenlighted an incursion into territory ruled peacefully by the SDF for over a decade.

Amid Risch’s warning, reports coming out of Syria claim skirmishes between the Syrian army and SDF are continuing. 

The news organization, Kurdistan 24, showed alleged footage of al-Sharaa’s forces releasing Islamic State prisoners. According to the report, ‘The Syrian Arab Army releases ISIS prisoners in al-Tabqah city.’ 

The footage has been widely posted on social media. Fox News Digital could not independently verify the video.

The State Department referred Fox News Digital to an X post from the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey, Tom Barrack, who also serves as the Special Envoy for Syria. Barrack wrote on X about the deal between SDF General Mazloum Abdi and al-Sharra.

‘Two great Syrian leaders, driven by the shared vision of liberating their country and people from tyranny, have now come together to forge a brighter future for all Syrians. This agreement and ceasefire represent a pivotal inflection point, where former adversaries embrace partnership over division.’

Barrack added, ‘President al-Sharaa has affirmed that the Kurds are an integral part of Syria, and the United States looks forward to the seamless integration of our historic partner in the fight against ISIS with the Global Coalition’s newest member, as we press forward in the enduring battle against terrorism.’

However, the People’s Protection Units (YPG) commander Sipan Hamo — a Syrian organization that is part of the SDF — said on the Saturday meeting between U.S. envoy Tom Barrack and Kurdish officials produced no roadmap to a ceasefire. He denied Syria’s Kurds wanted to secede or create an independent state and said their future was in Syria.

‘Our greatest hope is that there will be a tangible outcome, especially from the coalition and the United States, meaning that they will intervene more forcefully in the existing problems than what they are currently doing,’ Hamo said.

The head of the main Kurdish forces told Reuters that the U.S. should intervene more forcefully to end a Syrian offensive that has gained key territory from Kurdish fighters in recent days.

Government troops launched an offensive on Saturday into territory run for the last decade by semi-autonomous Kurdish authorities in the northeast of Syria, capturing towns on both sides of the Euphrates River and the country’s largest oil and gas field, officials and security sources said.

But given Kurdish ‘concerns about the changes taking place,’ the U.S. should offer assurances of protection to them.

Hamo said that, ‘In the current situation and the chaos we are living in, the only ones who can offer guarantees are the United States or the coalition,’ he added in a rare interview from Hasakeh province, which is still under Kurdish control.

‘We believe that the responsibility for everything currently happening inside Syria lies with the Western countries, and especially the United States of America,’ he said.

‘Of course, we consider Israel a powerful state in the region with its own agenda. We hope that the same stance taken by other countries in the region towards certain minorities in Syria will be extended to the Kurds as well,’ Hamo said.

Asked if he was referring to Israel’s stance towards the Druze minority last summer — when Israel carried out air strikes on the defense ministry, near the presidential palace in Damascus and on Syrian troops advancing on Druze cities, Hamo said, ‘of course.’

Mutlu Civiroglu, a Kurdish affairs analyst, told Fox News Digital that, ‘President Trump has spoken about giving Syria and all its peoples a fresh opportunity to turn a new page. Yet, Ahmed al Sharaa’s actions appear to move against that intention, and many Kurds believe he is abusing the political space that was meant to support stability rather than deepen tensions. ‘

Civiroglu added that ‘I don’t think the U.S. is abandoning the Kurds, but President Trump’s good intention is being abused by Sharaa. Lawmakers in Washington have also expressed unease about the interim Syrian government’s treatment of minorities, which reflects broader questions about its commitment to inclusive governance.’

Civiroglu posted footage on his popular X account of al-Sharaa supporters toppling ‘a statue of a female Kurdish fighter after interim Syrian government forces seized Tabqa from the SDF. Kurdish fighters backed by the United States had liberated the town from ISIS in May 2017.’

Civiroglu said, ‘al-Sharaa’s confrontations with Kurdish forces, following earlier pressure on Alawite and Druze areas, reinforce doubts about the interim government’s legitimacy and its ability to represent Syria’s diverse population.

‘The International community must remember that the Kurdish people have long fought alongside the United States, France and the West in the campaign against ISIS, and many are watching closely to see how these partners interpret the latest escalation,’ he said.

Max Abrahms, a leading expert on counter-terrorism and a professor of political science at Northeastern University, told Fox News Digital, ‘The YPG and then SDF were America’s primary counterterrorism forces against Islamic State in Syria during the war. Unlike the so-called ‘rebels,’ our Kurdish warrior friends exhibited both capability and moderation. It’s not surprising that the jihadists, upon taking power in Damascus, would turn their guns on the Kurdish forces. Of course, we need to stand with them.’

The bipartisan push for sanctions against Russia has, for several months, ebbed and flowed on waves of speculation about whether legislation would actually get a vote.

A signal or suggestion of support from President Donald Trump would often push the bill from Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., closer to fruition, only to be swept back into churning, murky waters with no clear path on when or if the package would make its way to the president’s desk.

Now, Trump has given Graham the ‘greenlight’ to move ahead with his long-simmering sanctions package as peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine continue to simmer in the background.

Graham told Fox News Digital that this time around, he believed the bill would actually get a shot.

‘It’s never going back on the shelf because President Trump believes he needs it,’ Graham said. ‘I think he needs it.’

But it has been over a week since Graham announced the president backed the package, and so far, it has yet to make it to the floor in the upper chamber. Lawmakers are also out this week and are set to return to Washington, D.C., next week with the primary objective of preventing a partial government shutdown.

Still, the bipartisan duo has been tweaking the legislation over the last several months, but the core objective would be to slap eye-popping tariffs onto countries buying energy products from Moscow.

The intent is to cripple Russia’s war machine by imposing duties on oil, gas, uranium and other exports, largely purchased by China and India, which account for nearly three-quarters of Moscow’s energy business.

The package has been on the back burner as the Trump administration works to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. The latest iteration of that agreement generally included provisions that would have required Ukraine to give up territory to Russia, a non-starter for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Trump told Reuters during an interview published last week that it was Zelenskyy holding up negotiations toward a peace deal and contended that Russian President Vladimir Putin was ‘ready to make a deal,’ while Ukraine was ‘less ready to make a deal.’

While the package hasn’t dislodged itself onto the floor in the upper chamber, a White House official confirmed to Fox News Digital that Trump supports the legislation.

But one issue that threatens to trip up the process once more is where the package actually starts in Congress.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., doubled down on his position that any Russia sanctions package, despite being labored on in the Senate for several months, should start in the House, given the budgetary impact it could have.

That would require buy-in from House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to either replicate Graham and Blumenthal’s proposal, or craft their own. Then it would need to hit the House floor, which could take longer than lawmakers in the upper chamber are willing to wait.

On whether Johnson said he would put it on the floor, Thune said, ‘He hasn’t.’

‘But my guess is that if it’s something that, you know, the White House — it’s important to them, it’s a priority, particularly dealing with Russia and Ukraine, I would assume that they would try and do that,’ he said.

That’s where there’s a disconnect.

Johnson supports Russia sanctions but has said on multiple occasions that he believes a sanctions bill should originate in the Senate.

He has argued that starting the legislation in the House would drastically slow down its progress, given the numerous committees any package would have to pass through before ever hitting the floor for a vote.

Graham believed that the ‘sense of urgency now is the greatest it’s been’ and noted that he has told Thune that he wants the legislation to start in the Senate, where it has over 80 co-sponsors.

‘This is where the idea came from, get a big bipartisan vote and try to get President Trump to use these tools coming from the Congress so we can end this bloodbath,’ Graham said.

‘Now, in a normal world it would, but I just think the momentum is in the Senate,’ he continued. ‘We can take a shell — It’s not that hard. I mean, I’ve been working my a– [off] on this thing for over a year, or whatever how long it’s been.’

Blumenthal told Fox News Digital that he had been speaking with his colleagues in the lower chamber and added that there’s ‘no reason’ that the package should get bogged down or tripped up in the House.

Blumenthal and Graham view their sanctions push as providing Trump with another weapon to force Putin to the negotiating table.

He argued that ‘security is the linchpin here, but forcing Putin to come to the table also involves economic pressure, and ultimately, we want peace, and that will involve both economic and military security.’

‘I feel very, very encouraged, because I think that a lot is coming together,’ Blumenthal said.

Donald Trump made ‘you’re fired’ a national catchphrase from his TV show ‘The Apprentice.’ Now the power of the president to unilaterally decide who can continue to serve in key government positions will be tested Wednesday at the U.S. Supreme Court, in another major case over leadership removals from independent agencies.

At the center of the latest constitutional showdown is Lisa Cook, who serves precariously on the Federal Reserve’s powerful Board of Governors.

Trump claims broad authority to force Cook from her leadership position on the central bank, free from judicial review, with his administration alleging she committed private mortgage fraud.

Oral arguments will be conducted by the nine justices, who will hear separately from lawyers representing Cook and the Justice Department.

As the elected head of the government, Trump believes federal law allows him unqualified discretion to fire ‘for cause’ any officer on the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors or member of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). 

But Cook will tell the court the Federal Reserve was created by Congress in 1913 as a wholly independent entity, to insulate it from political influence, and from any one president ‘stacking the deck’ with their own nominees.

She claims to be a political pawn in Trump’s very public efforts to dictate the Federal Reserve’s economic policies, by exploiting what she calls ‘manufactured charges’ of wrongdoing.

This appeal comes as Trump’s feud with the Fed has expanded, after its chairman, Jerome Powell, disclosed recently the agency was subpoenaed by the Justice Department for allegations he lied to Congress about a controversial multimillion-dollar renovation of the agency’s headquarters.

The high court will have at least four opportunities this term to define the limits of Trump’s aggressive view of his authority, including import tariffs and birthright citizenship.

‘A big fraction of the Supreme Court’s docket will present the question, can President Trump do: fill in the blank? And that could be imposed tariffs. Fire board members. Remove illegal aliens,’ said Thomas Dupree, a former top Justice Department attorney and leading appellate attorney. ‘Trump is pushing at every limit and the Supreme Court this term is going to be telling us whether he’s exceeded those limits. That is, I think, going to the story of so much of what the Supreme Court is deciding this term.’   

The Issues

The conservative court has allowed much of President Trump’s challenged executive actions to be enforced at least temporarily – and will now decide whether the Fed’s special mandate statutorily protects its governing members from getting ousted.

The justices last month heard arguments in a separate case, on Trump’s efforts to remove Democrat-appointed Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which like the Fed is a congressionally created independent, multi-member regulatory agency.

The 6-3 conservative majority in that petition appeared ready to rule for the president when it involves semi-autonomous agencies like the FTC.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor at argument accused the administration of trying to ‘destroy the structure of government.’

But Justice Neil Gorsuch countered that when it comes to agencies like the FTC, ‘there is no such thing in our constitutional order as a fourth branch of government that’s quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative.’

Both Slaughter and Cook were named to their current staggered terms by former President Joe Biden, but Slaughter and another Democratic-appointed member are now not allowed to continue serving while their lawsuits are decided.

In the Cook case, lower courts ruled she did not receive due process when the president tried to fire her.

The current posture of the case is whether Trump can remove Cook — at least temporarily — while the dispute continues to play out on the merits. The ‘for cause’ removal restriction’s constitutionality is not directly before the justices.

A federal judge had issued a preliminary injunction against the administration, which then sought relief from the Supreme Court on the limited enforcement issue.

The nine-member bench now has the option of ruling narrowly on the injunction question — which would throw the case back to the district court. Or the high court could go ahead and decide the larger constitutional matters.

One key argument topic could center on whether the Federal Reserve has some administrative nexus to the executive branch, which could put it at least under limited Trump control.

Though its leaders are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, the seven-member board is considered an independent government agency, since its monetary policy decisions do not need presidential or legislative approval. But the agency does provide Congress with regular reports on its work.

It also does not receive any federal funding, and the terms of the members of the board of governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

Under law, the Federal Reserve’s leadership has a three-fold mandate: ‘maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.’

The 12 Federal Reserve Banks are not part of the federal government, but set up like private corporations, and regionally located across the country.

The justices, in an unsigned order in a separate case in 2025, had suggested the Fed operates differently from other independent federal boards, since it is not funded by Congress through normal appropriations, but uses interest on securities the bank owns and acquired through open market operations.

‘The Federal Reserve is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States,’ said the Supreme Court in May 2025.

After paying its expenses, the Federal Reserve hands the rest of its earnings over to the U.S. Treasury.

Federal feud

Trump repeatedly has blasted Powell and the Federal Reserve over reluctance to lower benchmark interest rates as aggressively as the president wants, in a fundamental disagreement over prudent ways to stimulate the national economy.

Like Cook, Powell in an extraordinary video statement Sunday accused the president of investigating him as ‘pretexts’ for ‘political pressure or intimidation.’

‘The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president,’ he said.

Trump on Tuesday called Powell ‘either incompetent or crooked.’

Powell’s term as chairman ends in May, but he has the option of remaining on the Board for another two years. Trump has been conducting a very transparent interview campaign with candidates for Powell’s successor to lead the central bank.

The high court will try to cast all the Washington drama aside and focus on what shapes up as a major test of executive and judicial power.

The Federal Reserve Act (FRA) says the president can only remove members of the Fed board and FOMC ‘for cause.’ The exact parameters of that standard were not spelled out in the original law, and never fully tested in the courts.

Cook — appointed for a 14-year term by Biden in 2023 — will remain on the job at least until the court decides the current legal questions.

No president has fired a sitting Fed governor in the law’s 112-year history.

‘Put simply, the president may reasonably determine that interest rates paid by the American people should not be set by a governor who appears to have lied about facts material to the interest rates she secured for herself— and refuses to explain the apparent misrepresentations,’ said Solicitor General D. John Sauer in the administration’s appeal.

The Justice Department will argue that removal protection power is discretionary and unenforceable.

But Cook’s lawyers counter, ‘Granting that relief would dramatically alter the status quo, ignore centuries of history, and transform the Federal Reserve into a body subservient to the President’s will.’

The court’s decision to take up the case comes months after U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb issued a preliminary injunction last month blocking Trump from firing Cook from the Fed while the case continued to play out in court.’

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit voted 2-1 in September 2025 to deny Trump’s request for intervention, prompting the administration to make its case to the Supreme Court for emergency review.

The Stakes

The Supreme Court update comes as Trump has for months pressured the Federal Reserve to slash interest rates, in a bid to help spur the nation’s economic growth.

But his attempt to fire Cook for alleged mortgage fraud violations, which she has denied, has teed up a first-of-its-kind judicial clash that could have profound impacts on the Fed itself, and the Supreme Court’s review authority.

She strongly denies accusations of falsely claiming two homes in Georgia and Michigan as her primary residence to secure better mortgage terms. She has not been charged with any crime.

Cook’s legal team — featuring prominent conservative attorney and former Justice Scalia law clerk Paul Clement — sued Trump in late August 2025 for his attempt to fire her, arguing it violated her due process rights under the Fifth Amendment, as well as her statutory right to notice and a hearing under the FRA.

She has not been charged with any criminal act.

The next Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting is scheduled for Jan. 27–28, with an expected interest rate decision. Both Powell and Cook are each set to participate.

Financial markets, private banks, businesses and investors will be closely watching what the Supreme Court does in the Federal Reserve dispute, and a separate pending appeal over Trump’s sweeping reciprocal global tariffs.

A written ruling in that import tax case, which was argued by the justices in November, could come at any time.

The Fed case is Trump v. Cook (25a312). A decision there could come relatively quickly within weeks, or potentially as late as June or early July.

A group of House Democrats is moving to block President Donald Trump from acquiring Greenland in direct defiance of one of the commander in chief’s main foreign policy goals.

Rep. Gabe Amo, D-R.I., announced late Sunday that he introduced a bill to prevent Trump from using federal dollars to buy Greenland.

The legislation already has more than 20 House Democratic co-sponsors and is likely to get more as the week progresses.

‘Greenland is not for sale, no matter what Trump says. That’s why I led 21 [House Democrats] in introducing the NO NATO for Purchase Act to make sure your taxpayer dollars aren’t spent on Trump’s next property boondoggle,’ Amo wrote on X.

A publicly available summary of his bill stated its purpose as ‘to prohibit actions or expenditure of funds to purchase a North Atlantic Treaty Organization member country or NATO-protected territory.’

It comes as Trump and his allies continue to insist that getting Greenland under U.S. rule is critical to enhancing national security.

Trump has pushed to acquire Greenland, a territory of Denmark, since his first White House term.

Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with officials from Greenland and Denmark last week, but it appears that little progress has been made on either side.

‘The discussions focused on how to ensure the long-term security in Greenland. And here, our perspectives continue to differ, I must say. The president has made his view clear. And we have a different position,’ Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen told reporters afterward.

Meanwhile, a bipartisan group of lawmakers — consisting mainly of Democrats — embarked on a congressional delegation trip to Denmark over the weekend to meet with officials there.

Trump himself posted on Truth Social on Sunday night, ‘NATO has been telling Denmark, for 20 years, that ‘you have to get the Russian threat away from Greenland.’ Unfortunately, Denmark has been unable to do anything about it. Now it is time, and it will be done!!!’

The Trump administration has made clear that it hopes to purchase Greenland from Denmark, but the president himself has not ruled out using military force either.

The idea of a military invasion of Greenland has rattled lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, with foreign relations hawks arguing it would be a violation of NATO’s Article V by one of the organization’s own leading members.

House Democrats’ bill is not likely to be taken up by the House, however, nor would it be likely to pass if it were.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for a response to the legislation.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) on Monday withdrew an invitation for Iran’s foreign minister to attend the Davos summit in Switzerland after an advocacy group urged it to bar Iranian regime officials amid nationwide anti-government protests that have left thousands dead.

In a post on X, the WEF confirmed that Abbas Araghchi would not be permitted to attend the five-day event.

‘Although he was invited last fall, the tragic loss of lives of civilians in Iran over the past few weeks means that it is not right for the Iranian government to be represented at Davos this year,’ the organization said. 

The announcement comes after the advocacy group United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) sent a letter to WEF President Børge Brende on Friday, urging him to rescind the invitation and bar Iranian regime officials from attending amid a brutal crackdown on civilians.

UANI CEO Ambassador Mark Wallace welcomed the decision, telling Fox News Digital in a statement after Araghchi’s invitation was withdrawn: ‘UANI commends the World Economic Forum for revoking the invitation of Iran’s Foreign Minister from this year’s gathering in Davos. Iranian regime representatives should not be platformed at international events given their crimes against the Iranian people and their long history of supporting terrorism.’

Iran is currently facing nationwide anti-government protests that have drawn a violent response from security forces and placed growing pressure on Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), which tracks human rights violations in Iran, said on Sunday that nationwide protests continued into the 22nd day as President Donald Trump weighs possible U.S. military action.

The group’s aggregated figures showed 624 recorded protests, the arrest of at least 24,669 people and the confirmed deaths of 3,919 individuals.

HRANA said 3,685 of those killed were protesters, including 25 children under the age of 18.

Nearly 9,000 deaths remain under investigation.

White House press secretary Karoline Levitt said at a press briefing last week that the Trump administration was closely watching the situation in Iran.

‘All options remain on the table for the president,’ she told reporters.

A Senate Republican wants to dramatically expand the federal government’s ability to denaturalize a citizen with legislation built to withstand challenges in court.

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., plans to introduce his Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation (SCAM) Act to develop a series of wide-ranging legal triggers for the denaturalization process in the wake of the Minnesota fraud scandal.

Schmitt’s legislation is designed to bolster the government’s ability to strip a naturalized person of their citizenship, but it does not stop at targeting just fraudsters.

The SCAM Act creates a 10-year window, post-naturalization that, if a person were to hit a series of triggers, would lower the threshold for the federal government to strike their citizenship and begin the deportation process.

Among the acts that would fall under the scope of Schmitt’s legislation are whether a person defrauded a federal, state, local or tribal government of $10,000 or more, committed espionage, committed an aggravated felony, or is affiliated with a foreign terrorist organization.

The lawmaker argued that people who trigger those requisites ‘must be denaturalized because they have proven they never met the requirements for the great honor of American citizenship in the first place.’

‘The rampant fraud uncovered in Minnesota must be a wakeup call,’ Schmitt said. ‘People who commit felony fraud, serious felonies, or join terrorist organizations like drug cartels shortly after taking their citizenship oaths fail to uphold the basic standards of citizenship.’

Schmitt’s legislation specifically targets the ‘good moral character’ factor in the naturalization process, which requires a person to engage in moral and ethical conduct for up to five years before applying for citizenship.

The bill would automatically and retroactively undermine that key step in the naturalization process and contends that the aforementioned acts committed post-naturalization act as proof that a person never qualified for citizenship in the first place.

It also has a built-in mechanism to deal with challenges to the legislation in court, specifically to automatically switch out the 10-year window — if found unconstitutional — with a five-year window.

His legislation also has the backing of the White House and was lauded by Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy and President Donald Trump’s Homeland Security advisor.

Prosecutors digging into the sprawling Minnesota fraud scandal estimate upward of $9 billion in stolen funds and have charged several native-Somali residents in connection with the boondoggle.

‘The Somali fraud scandal is one of the greatest financial scandals in American history,’ Miller said. ‘All Somali refugees, or any other immigrants, who have committed fraud against the United States must be immediately denaturalized and deported.’

In 2012, the Obama administration decided that America’s kids didn’t need whole milk. As a result, our children missed out on essential nutrition and our farmers lost critical income. Obama-era economic stagnation and anti-agriculture policies, including those promoting the Green New Scam multiplied hardships on the farm and many hardworking Americans began to lose hope.

Nearly one year ago, President Donald Trump’s inauguration restored that hope, and today he renews it. In signing the Whole Milk for Heathy Kids Act, President Trump delivers on his promise to put the welfare of American farmers and American children first.

While President Barack Obama took away market share from America’s dairy farmers to fight the war on healthy fats, President Trump is expanding markets both at home and abroad, pushing for better real food options for our kids.

The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act, sponsored by Sens. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., and Peter Welch, D-Vt., and championed by Rep. Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., and Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., restores whole milk to schools across the nation, delivering real food for the next generation and standing up for the farmers who feed this country.

This issue is near and dear to my heart. Last year at my confirmation hearing, Sen. Marshall asked me if whole milk belongs in school lunches. I enthusiastically agreed. I also shared that growing up, my mom made sure that our refrigerator was always well stocked with whole milk. She instinctively knew that whole milk was a building block to a healthy future for me and my younger sisters.

So much has changed since the founding of our nation 250 years ago, but the benefits of drinking whole milk have remained the same. If anything, the nutrients that whole milk naturally provides are more in demand than ever before.

The childhood health crisis currently facing our nation is nothing less than an existential threat.

Over 75% of kids in America struggle with obesity, poor physical fitness or related health challenges. These rising rates of chronic disease are influenced by several factors, but diet plays a central role.

We have a responsibility to help fix this crisis, especially since it was partly driven by misguided federal nutrition policies that replaced real food with ideology.

The absence of whole milk from schools has long been overlooked by countless public officials, but President Trump noticed and has done something about it. This administration understands that the national health crisis cannot be overcome without reorienting federal nutrition policy around science and real-world outcomes.

The Trump administration understands that the national health crisis cannot be overcome without reorienting federal nutrition policy around science and real-world outcomes.

Let’s be clear—whole milk isn’t just another drink on a school lunch tray. It’s a nutrient-dense, affordable source of protein, calcium, vitamin D, and healthy fats that growing bodies and minds need to thrive.

Bringing whole milk back to schools also builds on this month’s release of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030, which recognize full-fat milk, protein and healthy fats as essential building blocks of a balanced diet.

For the first time in years, federal guidance and school meal programs will complement one another, sending a consistent message to families about what healthy eating really looks like.

The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act restores flexibility to schools, allowing them to offer whole, reduced-fat, low-fat, or fat-free milk. This is a win for local communities and parents, who can now make choices that best serve their kids.

And equally important, it’s also a win for American farmers—the backbone of rural America.

School meal programs create consistent demand for their products, strengthen local economies and reconnect children to the food that truly fuels them. And after Thursday’s announcement, the demand for whole milk will take off like a rocket.

So, to America’s dairy farmers: get ready. Gone are the days of declining milk consumption driven by failed Obama-era policy. Your hard work is back where it belongs, front and center in feeding our nation’s children.

This isn’t about partisan politics. It’s about practical, commonsense government policy, and it’s exactly the kind of real-world reform President Trump was elected to carry out.

Multiple Iranian state TV channels were hacked on Sunday amid a near-total internet shutdown to air footage of exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi and images of anti-government protests that have rocked Tehran in recent weeks.

Two clips of Pahlavi were shown as well as a graphic calling on Iranian security forces to side with the public, The Associated Press reported.

‘Don’t point your weapons at the people. Join the nation for the freedom of Iran,’ one graphic read, according to a translation from the outlet.

Pahlavi himself called on Iran’s military to break with the Islamic Republic and side with the people.

‘I have a special message for the military. You are the national army of Iran, not the Islamic Republic army,’ he said in the hacked broadcast. ‘You have a duty to protect your own lives. You don’t have much time left. Join the people as soon as possible.’

The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), which tracks human rights violations in Iran, said on Sunday that nationwide protests continued into the 22nd day as President Donald Trump weighs possible U.S. military action.

The group’s aggregated figures showed 624 recorded protests, the arrest of at least 24,669 people and the confirmed deaths of 3,919 individuals.

HRANA said 3,685 of those killed were protesters, including 25 children under the age of 18.

Nearly 9,000 deaths remain under investigation.

Iran International reported that witnesses across multiple cities told them security forces stormed hospitals, removed injured protesters and interfered with medical care, while reports from other areas described overwhelmed morgues and a strong security presence around medical facilities.

The outlet also reported that witnesses described injured protesters being left without medical care after shootings, as ambulances failed to arrive and phone networks were unavailable.

Others said hospitals were inaccessible or refused treatment, resulting in some wounded protesters bleeding to death while taking shelter in nearby buildings.

President Donald Trump is weighing whether to pull the trigger and launch strikes against Iran — a move that could potentially expose the weaknesses of both Russia and China, according to experts. 

While Russia and China have sought to make inroads in areas of Africa and Latin America — presenting themselves as partners for infrastructure and military equipment — neither Russia nor China intervened to defend their ally Venezuela when the U.S. took action Jan. 3 to topple dictator Nicolás Maduro’s regime. 

Potential strikes in Iran, coupled with the strikes in Venezuela to overthrow Maduro, would drive home just how formidable the U.S. is and even near-peer adversaries like Beijing can’t compete, according to experts. 

‘Beijing would likely respond with familiar condemnations and calls for restraint, but the deeper takeaway would be uncomfortable: China’s partnerships offer little protection when the United States decides to act,’ Craig Singleton, a senior China fellow for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said in a statement Wednesday. ‘Venezuela made that clear regionally; Iran would underscore it globally. Chinese officials will brand Washington reckless or rogue, but privately this episode would validate long-standing Chinese views about how power is actually exercised and that the U.S. is the only country willing and able to project force across multiple theaters on short notice.’

‘Two complex military operations in two regions just two weeks apart would reinforce a core assessment inside China’s system: America’s military might remains unmatched, and Washington is willing to use it when it judges the risks manageable,’ Singleton said. ‘That combination commands professional respect even as it sharpens Chinese unease.’ 

Mark Cancian, a senior advisor with the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ defense and security department, voiced similar sentiments and said that countries like Iran and Venezuela who’ve cozied up to Russia and Beijing are likely realizing the pitfalls of those ties. 

For example, Venezuela has had long-standing ties to Russia and has purchased Russian military equipment — yet Russia was not there to safeguard Caracas from U.S. strikes or prevent the U.S. from capturing Maduro, Cancian said. Another military strike in Iran would only expose Russia and China’s limitations further, Cancian said.

‘I think many countries are seeing that Russia and China can’t protect them, that those alliances have severe limitations,’ Cancian told Fox News Digital Friday. 

‘I think that a strike on Iran would make the same point,’ Cancian said. 

According to Cancian, the reason Moscow and Beijing can’t defend their allies and partners is because neither maintains a global military like the U.S. does. 

‘The United States does maintain United bases all over the world,’ Cancian said. ‘It has a Navy that deploys all over the world. The Chinese don’t have that. The Russians don’t have that. So although they have powerful militaries, they don’t have the global capability to protect allies and partners.’

Meanwhile, Trump is still weighing whether he’ll conduct strikes on Iran again. The president told reporters Jan. 11 on Air Force One that the administration was ‘looking at some very strong options,’ and Tuesday said that all meetings with the Iranian regime were scrapped until ‘the senseless killing of protesters STOPS.’ He said that those who’ve killed anti-regime demonstrators will face consequences. 

On Wednesday, Trump told reporters that even though ‘killing in Iran is stopping,’ he wouldn’t rule out military action and that the U.S. would ‘watch and see’ what happens. Meanwhile, Trump said Friday that he had held off on strikes for now because Iran had canceled executions for more than 800 people.

Protests broke out across Iran in December 2025 in response to economic hardships facing the country, as well as a referendum against Iran’s theocratic regime. 

More than 2,000 people — including at least nine children — have died in the recent protests, the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency reported Tuesday. 

Trump authorized several major military operations in recent months, on top of the strikes in Venezuela. For example, he also signed off on strikes in Nigeria and Syria in December targeting those affiliated with the Islamic State.

This also wouldn’t be the first time Trump has conducted strikes against Iran — should he choose to go through with them. In June, he signed off on strikes targeting Iran’s nuclear sites Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

They say when you’re born, you come into life with no instruction manual.

If we’re lucky, we inherit a good set of parents, who set us up with good habits and sound thinking.

We might pursue a religious practice, embrace an education, and learn to think for ourselves.

Others might not be so lucky. Anxious and unsure — we turn to other things to make sense of reality — drugs, alcohol, sex or easy money.

Without a set of instructions, we rely on what we think is our operating system: the ego.

And we protect it with all our might.

It is the ego, after all, that gets us into fights, creates resentments and wastes our time thinking about the past — ignoring the glories of the present. We find ourselves angry and irritable — pissed off at a coworker, cut off from a relative, mad over current events. And it is a devotion to an ego that makes us powerless to predict life’s terms or life’s turns. We end up more wrong than right, and our ego rages in response.

I came across Scott Adams accidentally, but it couldn’t have come at a better time for me.

It was around 2015 or so, and I was hot and bothered by Donald Trump. 

My friends and relatives had jumped aboard the Trump train, but I resisted — and resentfully so. I had my reasons for it, no doubt. But I never question what lurked beneath those reasons. Turns out it was self-doubt — the weak armor of an insecure ego. 

I found myself dreading work, and angry that nearly all my predictive powers had failed. Every day I would say, ‘Trump’s finished!’ and he only got stronger. This wasn’t like me.

But one day on Twitter, some soul I’ll never be able to thank tweeted a simple suggestion: read Scott Adams. And, in a rare moment, I decided to heed a comment on Twitter. I googled Scott’s blog. And it changed my life.

Scott was already a world-famous cartoonist, of course — the creator of ‘Dilbert.’ He had a pile of bestsellers.

Scott loved humans, but understood the nature of their pain — caused by how little they understood the reality behind the one they took as real.  

But I knew little of that world. And I had no idea what I would discover when I entered the Scott Adams universe — a place where the most profound thinker ruled with a cup of coffee, a goofy grin and a deep understanding of moist robots — i.e. humans.

Scott loved humans, but understood the nature of their pain — caused by how little they understood the reality behind the one they took as real.  

While some people would tell you they knew life’s secrets in order to impress upon you their brilliance — Scott was only trying to help. It’s why Dilbert was so successful. He was expressing the reality behind the reality. And we immediately got the joke.

Reality is subjective. And we see things as we think they are — not how they really are. And we foolishly make predictions based on those assumptions.

We had no answer key to life — and for many of us, that led us to making the same mistakes over and over. But Scott explained to us the conceptual reality behind the physical one — and it was the world of persuasion. He calmly explained how it operates — which in time made it possible to almost predict anything.  Once you knew how persuasion worked, you could see around most corners.

This was the difference between Scott and most intellectuals trying to flex their brilliance.

They were interested in reversing reality — but Scott was merely trying to explain it.

And he did that every morning.

It was then, daily, that I listened to ‘Coffee with Scott Adams’ — certain I would glean some valuable insight into the world. And that prediction never failed. He would offer reframes of issues and ideas that would change the way I looked at things.   

 I remember Scott talking about the joys of being fired.

Having been fired 3 times in my life — I remember being angry and resentful after each one. Turned out, as Scott pointed out, I should have been grateful — because each  firing was a step forward into a better career.  My life never got worse after being fired — it only got better.

And this pretty much holds true for everyone. Being unhappy over a firing was based on a faulty assumption that the game had just ended. When, in fact, you were just entering a new level. The game started anew.  And you could do anything.

It also helped that he framed getting fired — as well as getting dumped — through the same simple filter: that the relationship was not a good fit.  Once you look at losing a job or the girl as ‘not a good fit,’ you have eliminated a wound on your ever-present ego. It’s not about you.

And that frees you from the bag of rocks known as bitterness.

The ego is something that we all have and few can control. Usually the ego runs our lives, often into the ground. But Scott reframed it with an analogy — and I quote it often…

 Imagine a person asks you to carry an original Picasso down the block to a gallery. You oblige, and the journey is harrowing. You pack up the painting, you wait for the rain to stop, you walk carefully and timidly — step by tiny step — terrified of pedestrians and puddles.  Now imagine that same person asking you to carry a potato. Sure, no problem! You throw the spud in your pocket and head out. And if you drop it, no big deal — it’s just a potato!

Then comes Scott’s kill shot on the ego: Right now, your ego is a Picasso. From now on, think of it as a potato.

And when I did that, I felt a weight lift. I worried less about slights, or embarrassments.  If I was wrong, I embraced it. In fact, losing the ego enabled me to see the worth in being wrong — for it merely sharpened my own ideas.  I abandoned the sunk cost fallacy and learned to leave stupid opinions behind.

Scott believed in a higher power — that there is more to the world than just the physical reality. 

He put his money on a simulation — that God might actually be a programmer.  He would often point to an underlying structure that guides us. 

I hate that Scott is gone, because he helped me so much. He changed the way I thought, and by doing so made me a happier, better version of myself.

 Scott hadn’t invented the idea — he was simply discovering things about life and shared them with you. This is why when you listened to his morning show you felt that you were on an anthropological dig, led by an incredibly brilliant archaeologist sifting through today’s news, showing us the things that we overlooked — things that point to a reality we didn’t know existed. You might call it God. Or a simulation. But it was there alright. A design and a Designer.

Adams pointed to a conceptual reality that lurks behind the physical one. And without understanding that secret knowledge, we are often disappointed and resentful.  

When Scott would go to his whiteboard during his podcast, he would explain this clearly and without ego. He used his unique power for good -– showing you how to reframe things like laziness, or failure, death, or loss–in ways that bettered your existence.

He often referred to the mind’s mental shelf space. And while you cannot stop thinking bad thoughts (which depress you), you can crowd that stuff out and off the shelf with positive thoughts.  Which is why he championed positive affirmations. 

His treatment for laziness is quick and effective: imagine the outcome instead of the effort.

That tip combined both the affirmations and the shelf space analogy.  Right now, your brain is focusing on the effort to do the dishes; when you could be thinking about how great it is that you have clean dishes in the cupboard and a spotless kitchen counter. You think a good thought, which crowds the bad one out — and the outcome is realized.

I am avoiding the real benefit of Scott Adams. Because it hurts. It’s friendship. I lost a dear friend, someone I loved. A mentor obviously, but a friend I adored.

In his podcasts, Scott offered his hand to everyone — he would be there, 7 am West Coast time, whether you showed up or not, because he knew that whoever did show up, needed a friend. 

I would exercise with Scott’s morning show on, daily — for nearly a decade. I would be pumping away on the Peloton, my ears fixated on Scott’s observations — pausing every now and then to send myself a note about something amazing that Scott just said.

When my life changed — having a baby — I ended up not being able to listen to Scott live — so I looked forward to the comfort of a podcast banked for later.

I am avoiding the real benefit of Scott Adams. Because it hurts. It’s friendship. I lost a dear friend, someone I loved. A mentor obviously, but a friend I adored.

It was a good feeling to remember that, ‘Oh yeah, I have a Scott Adams I didn’t get to!’  It might be Scott’s greatest accomplishment — creating a community of gentle, intelligent beings who met every morning to share in a sip of a beverage of their choice.  Those who didn’t get it… well, too bad.

There are those who remain critical of Scott — but I attribute that to their ignorance. Not ignorance in general, but specific to Scott.  They just had no idea what they were dealing with, when they disparaged him. It’s like rejecting a gold bar because it’s too heavy.

Fact is, the more you got to know him, the more valuable he became.

He was the exception to his own frame known as ‘The Basket Case Theory’ — which stipulated that once you got to know someone you admired or envied — you’d find out they’re just as messed up as you. 

It was an excellent frame for people with anxiety or shyness. You might think that the unfamiliar people are judging you in that hip restaurant — but really, they’re too busy judging themselves. They have their own problems and trust me — you wouldn’t want them.  

Scott once was posed the question: would you trade your life with anyone?  It’s a good question for those of us who envy the rich and famous. 

But Scott said that you have no idea what the problems are of other people. The rich playboy may have syphilis; the popular actor may be riddled with alimony and addictions; the accomplished artist is almost always a nervous, palpable wreck.  It was a simple reframe that helped dispense with jealousy. 

But Scott’s own life subverted this frame — sure, he had his own problems; but the more you got to know him — that fuller picture made him only that much more endearing.

At a certain point in his life, Scott decided to devote himself to service, and he brought that service up to his dying breath. Instead of extinguishing the flame with assisted suicide months ago — once he felt the love swirling around him – he decided to stick around for our sake.

He wouldn’t leave us, not yet anyway.

He even reframed his death: that one’s death is a relief for the dying, for their problems have gone. It is we who are in pain, not him.

And it’s our selfish pain — that he decided to be there for!

I hate that he is gone, because he helped me so much. He changed the way I thought, and by doing so made me a happier, better version of myself.

I fear I will lose that gift now — with him gone, and I told him so a few months ago.

To which he said, ‘No, you got it now.’